On Tue, 13 May 2008 15:46:45 -0700 (PDT), Barb <sleibo@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
: It's me again, the original poster. Everyone has given some wonderful
: suggestions, and I appreciate them. I think my sister has things
: nailed as far as the composition goes, an "eye" for a great shot, and
: probably a lot of the innate qualities that make a photographer great.
: She has an amazing knack for capturing the moment. What is making her
: shake is the actual wedding ceremony itself, and just making sure she
: gets some decent shots of some of the special moments, in lighting
: that may not be as favorable as what she is used to. As for the bride
: and groom - they are totally non-fussy, even tho the reception will be
: at a Country Club, and my sister and her family are laid back as
: well.
In the overall context of things, failure to capture the ceremony may not
be
all that big a deal. Some churches don't allow photography during the
ceremony
anyway, or place such restrictions on it that good pictures are often hard
to
get, even for an experienced professional. If your sister gets good
pictures
after the ceremony and at the reception, that may be all that's required.
(And
as someone suggested, she should go to the rehearsal if possible. She may
get
some good pictures there, and at least it will be good practice.)
: I had a fiasco at my own wedding a hundred years ago with a
: 'professional' photographer that took 47 photos of a good friend of
: mine who looked like Farah Faucett (who btw used to be pretty good
: looking!) and exactly one of my grandmother. So the amateur status of
: my sis doesn't bother me much, either, and I think if she had
: equipment failure or any other catastrophe, no one would be too upset
: except her. That said, any helpful hints that have worked for any of
: you would surely be taken to heart. Thanks again in advance for your
: time and interest! Barb
I have an interesting situation coming up in a couple of weeks. Back when
I
was in college, one of my cousins got married. I had recently bought my
first
Nikon, and through some process I don't quite remember, I was designated
the
official photographer of the event. I did the best I could, shooting in
B&W
and making the prints myself. As I recall, they were adequate, although
nothing to really brag about. The bride and groom liked them well enough,
and
I'm told they still have them.
Now a bit of time has passed, and my cousin and his wife are about to
celebrate their 50th anniversary. My wife and I will be driving from
Boston to
Chicago for the occasion, hauling along our Canons and our collection of
lenses. I expect the whole weekend to be a grand photo shoot, wherein I'll
be
competing, in a way, with the original wedding photographer, which was me.
If
my pictures of the anniversary parties, taken with modern digital
equipment,
aren't an order of magnitude better than those I took 50 years ago, I'll
feel
like a dope.
So tell your sister that if she does too good a job, she may just be
providing
retroactive competition for herself in the future!
Bob
|
